Jury: SD at fault for fallen tree crushing man’s legs

San Diego  The city of San Diego is at fault for the condition of a giant palm tree that fell and crushed the legs of a Mission Hills man in 2010, a jury concluded Monday.

Michael Burke is shown at his Lark Street home, where he contends a queen palm tree the city should have maintained better fell on him during a January 2010 windstorm, crushing his legs. Burke is suing the city of San Diego, claiming that budget cuts slashed funding for tree maintenance.— Earnie Grafton

+Read Caption

Michael Burke is shown at his Lark Street home, where he contends a queen palm tree the city should have maintained better fell on him during a January 2010 windstorm, crushing his legs. Burke is suing the city of San Diego, claiming that budget cuts slashed funding for tree maintenance.
— Earnie Grafton

The verdict, reached after almost three days of deliberation by the San Diego Superior Court jury, means the city will have to pay some amount of damages to Michael Burke and his wife, Edith.

That phase of the trial began Monday afternoon and will likely take the rest of the week.

Burke, a lawyer, was paralyzed on Jan. 21, 2010, when a giant queen palm tree fell outside his Lark Street home and smashed his legs.

The tree was in the city’s right of way and crashed to the ground at the end of a four-day winter storm.

Burke’s lawsuit said that the city was responsible for the incident because it drastically cut back on yearly inspections and maintenance of trees because of budget woes in 2007.

Because the trial is ongoing, a spokesman for the City Attorney’s Office declined to comment on Monday’s finding.

Browne Greene, one of Burke’s lawyers, said he was happy for Burke and his wife. The finding could also benefit other residents and force the city to take a more proactive stance on inspecting trees in its right of way, Green said.

Burke’s injuries now require that he use a wheelchair to get around. His lawyers have said he has millions of dollars in bills and may have to have his legs amputated because of the severity of his injuries.

The city’s lawyers had argued the tree’s fall was an “act of God” that could not have been foreseen. They said the city never received complaints about the condition of the tree before it fell and could not have predicted the palm would fall on that day.

But Dan Balaban, one of Burke’s lawyers, argued that the city knew there were problems with trees falling throughout the city but did nothing to warn citizens like Burke. He said that two other trees had fallen in the same area previously — including one on the morning of Burke’s injury.

That tree fell and crushed Burke’s car just before 6:30 a.m. Burke was removing items from his trunk about two hours later when the second tree, about 60 feet tall and weighing approximately 2,600 pounds, fell and struck him.

Jurors had to determine if the tree that struck Burke was in a “dangerous condition” at the time and if so did it create a foreseeable risk of injury. They unanimously answered yes to both.

The jury then had to determine if the city had notice of the condition with enough time to do something to fix it. On that, the panel said yes by a vote of 10-2.

Lastly, the jury had to determine if the dangerous condition was a factor in Burke’s injury, and again it unanimously answered yes.

During the damages portion of the trial, Burke’s lawyers are expected to put on doctors and others who will testify about his injuries and the costs of caring for him in the future.